gerard at linuxfromscratch.org
Wed Feb 27 19:10:58 PST 2008
> Unless I misunderstood Gerard's proposal, that is what he is suggesting.
Yes, that's in essence what I was saying. Although I don't think it
possible to truly merge everything LFS-related project into one single
> We don't have (seemingly) the manpower and community interest any more
> to keep the current structure in place. I think the projects would have
> to be merged in order to continue.
I believe the drop in interest is party because of it's been too much of
the same-old same-old for too long. People get bored. It's time to think
of something new to keep energy and interest levels up.
>> Isn't it a weakness in the social structure of LFS that it could not hold
>> these resources together? Educational use is no excuse imvho.
> Very probably. And part of the issue, I think, has always been that
> different people see LFS from different viewpoints. This will always be
> the case to a certain extent, but perhaps, with a redesigned project,
> the potential for social problems can be taken into consideration as
> part of the re-design.
Simply put, part of the problem is that people get bored if there isn't
enough change within a project. This isn't an LFS community social
structure; it's human nature. You can only be in maintenance mode for
that long before people move on.
>> front. Package management is not going to help saving, if at all, anything.
> How it will be different is something that will have to be discussed.
Package management isn't meant to save the project. It's just one of
many improvements we can consider merging into the main project rather
than leaving it up to a project like ALFS to take care of.
More information about the lfs-dev